alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
                
                Defense Logistics Agency
                        The Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency
                    DLA
            Search
                        Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                            Search
                    Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                        Search
    Home

    What DLA Offers
    
        Excess Property Disposal

    Document Services

    Products

    Services

    Programs

    Working With DLA
    
        Applications

    Small Business

    Federal and International Cataloging

    Defense Data Standards

    Events

    Procurement Policies

    Government Programs

    Forms

    Organizations
    
        DLA Headquarters

    DLA Aviation

    DLA Disposition Services

    DLA Distribution

    DLA Energy

    DLA Land and Maritime

    DLA Troop Support

    DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM

    DLA Europe & Africa

    DLA Indo-Pacific

    Customer Support
    
        Self Help Tools

    How to Order

    Find Your Order

    Customer Facing Offices

    Training

    Brochures

    Warfighter Support

    Customer Service Management

    Careers

    About DLA
    
        Contact Us

    Locations

    Leaders

    News

    History

    Media Gallery

    DLA Campaigns  Home
  Land and Maritime
  About
  DLA Land and Maritime Image Galleries
 DLA Land and Maritime images
 Supply Chain Alliance and Exhibition
 DLA Land and Maritime News
 Hall of Fame Ceremonies
 DSCC Activities
 DLA Land and Maritime Hall of Fame ceremonies
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (2.51 MB)
 
 COVID-19 visits L&M news L&M
 Photo Gallery
 2024 DLA Supply Chain Alliance Conference and Exhibition Image Gallery
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (2.51 MB)
 
 COVID-19 visits L&M news L&M
 Photo Gallery
 DLA Land and Maritime news
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (2.51 MB)
 
 COVID-19 visits L&M news L&M
 Photo Gallery
 DSCC activities
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (2.51 MB)
 
 COVID-19 visits L&M news L&M
 Photo Gallery
 Contact UsSite IndexStrategic PlanDLA IG HotlineFOIANo FEAR ActWhistleblower ProtectionDLA CareersImagesWebmasterEEOSection 508Public AffairsSAPRExternal Links DisclaimerDOD Information Quality GuidelinesPrivacy/SecurityUSA.govDOD Web PolicyDOD Open GovernmentPlain Language
                    Stay Connected
            
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
EXHIBIT 21



The following is a list of the significant subsidiaries of the registrant as of February 27, 2004. Each such subsidiary does
business under its corporate name.



|                                         |  |                            
|---------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------
|List of Subsidiaries                     |  |                            
|                                         |  | Jurisdiction of            
|Subsidiary                               |  | Incorporation              
|                                         |  |                            
|EID Corporation                          |  | Liberia                    
|Ethyl Administration GmbH                |  | Switzerland                
|Ethyl Asia Pacific Company               |  | Virginia                   
|Ethyl Brasil Industria de Aditivos Ltda. |  | Brazil                     
|Ethyl Canada Holdings, Inc.              |  | Virginia                   
|Ethyl Canada Inc.                        |  | Province of Ontario, Canada
|Ethyl Europe S.P.R.L.                    |  | Belgium                    
|Ethyl Foreign Sales Corporation          |  | U.S. Virgin Islands        
|Ethyl Interamerica Corporation           |  | Delaware                   
|Ethyl Japan Holdings, Inc.               |  | Virginia                   
|Ethyl Japan Corporation                  |  | Japan                      
|Ethyl Mineraloel-Additive GmbH           |  | Germany                    
|Ethyl Petroleum Additives, Inc.          |  | Delaware                   
|Ethyl Petroleum Additives Limited        |  | United Kingdom             
|Ethyl Services GmbH                      |  | Switzerland                
|Ethyl Services Limited                   |  | United Kingdom             
|Ethyl UK Limited                         |  | United Kingdom             
|Ethyl Shipping Company Limited           |  | United Kingdom
No. 10-6570.

#### Ronald J. Mulder, Petitioner v. Brian Williams, Warden.

562 U.S. 1068, 131 S. Ct. 651,

178 L. Ed. 2d 489,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9342.

November 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 384 Fed. Appx. 666.
No. 10-7878.

#### Timothy Nicholls, Petitioner v. Colorado.

562 U.S. 1205, 131 S. Ct. 1054,

178 L. Ed. 2d 873,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 968.

January 24, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Colorado denied.
No. 10-10480.

#### James Dunn, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 838, 132 S. Ct. 146,

181 L. Ed. 2d 63,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5901.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.

*64Same case below, 394 U.S. App. D.C. 134, 631 F.3d 1291.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JEREMY WOLFSON,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., its successors in interest and/or Assigns; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 20

- 35792

D.C. No. 3:17

- cv - 06064

- BHS

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 14, 2021 * *

Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Jeremy Wolfson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his

action alleging Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( “ FDCPA ” ) and state law

claims

. W e have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 129 1. We review de novo. JL Beverage Co., LLC v. Jim Beam Brands Co. , 828 F.3d 1098, 1104 (9th Cir. 2016)

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

DEC 21 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 35792

(summary judgment); Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. , 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011) (dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)) . We affi rm. The district court properly granted summary judgment on Wolfson’s claims for defamation and replevin against defendants Bank of America , N.A. , Merscorp Holdings, Inc., and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as well as his claims against defendant MTC Financial d/b/a Trustee Corps , because Wolfson failed to raise a genuine dispute as to any material fact regarding these claims. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett , 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986) ( establishing that the party with the burden of proof at trial must “make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party ’ s case” to survive summary judgment )

. The district court properly dismissed Wolfson’s FDCPA claims because Wolfson failed to allege facts sufficient to show that defendant Bank of America, N.A., is considered a debt collector under the FDCPA

. See 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6)(F)(iii) (excluding from the definition of debt collector a party seeking to collect any debt owed where the debt concerned was not in default at the time it was acquired); De Dios v. Int’l Realty & Invs. , 641 F.3d 1071, 1074

- 75 & n.3 (9th Cir. 2011) ( explaining that under the FDCPA a “debt collector does not include those mortgage service companies and others who service outstanding debts for others, so long as the debts were not in default when taken for servicing” (citation3 20

- 35792

and internal quotation marks omitted) ).

The district court properly dismissed Wolfson’s quiet title claims because Wolfson failed to allege facts sufficient to state a claim. See Kobza v. Tripp , 18 P.3d 621, 623

- 24 (Wash. App. 2001) (plaintiff in quiet title action must be “in peaceable possession” of property). We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.
No. 10-1349.

#### Blondell F. Mitchell, Petitioner v. KDJM-FM, Jammin 92.5, et al.

565 U.S. 817, 132 S. Ct. 98,

181 L. Ed. 2d 27,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6659.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 405 Fed. Appx. 267.
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Elder, Clements and Senior Judge Annunziata 

MONROE EDWARD ALGER 

v. Record No. 3064-06-4 

DYNALECTRIC COMPANY AND 

 AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY 

 OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA MEMORANDUM OPINION*

 PER CURIAM 

DYNALECTRIC COMPANY AND MAY 15, 2007 

 AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY 

 OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA 

v. Record No. 3090-06-4 

MONROE EDWARD ALGER 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Julie H. Heiden; Koonz, McKenney, Johnson, DePaolis & 

Lightfoot, L.L.P., on briefs), for Monroe Edward Alger. 

 (Joseph C. Veith, III; Trichilo, Bancroft, McGavin, Horvath & 

Judkins, P.C., on briefs), for Dynalectric Company and American 

Casualty Company of Reading, Pennsylvania. 

 Monroe Edward Alger (claimant) appeals a decision of the Workers’ Compensation 

Commission finding that he failed to prove he remained totally disabled after July 29, 2005 and 

continuing as a result of his March 18, 2004 compensable injury by accident. Dynalectric 

Company and its insurer appeal that same decision finding that claimant’s back condition, 

disability, and medical treatment after June 22, 2004, were causally related to his compensable 

injury by accident. We have reviewed the record and the commission’s opinion and find that 

 *

 Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. 
- 2 -

these appeals are without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

commission in its final opinion. See Alger v. Dynalectric Co., VWC File No. 218-33-69 (Nov. 

16, 2006). We dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not 

aid the decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27. 

 Affirmed.
ENVIROSAFE SEALING SYSTEMS CO., INC. (ESSCO)

P.O. BOX 77077 BATO N ROUGE, LA 70897

225-753-1505 FAX 225-751-9562

WEB: www.sewerseals.com

EMAIL: Info@sewerseals.com

APPLICATIONS

QQQ/B-1 (FF) COMPLIANCE

STORM WATER PHASE II COMPLIANCE

NEW CONSTRUCTION

RETROFIT

MEASURE SHEETS

VENT SEALS

POWERPOINT PRESENTATIONSNEW CONSTRUCTION APPLICATIONS

CATCH BASINSNEW CONSTRUCTION APPLICATIONS

DRAIN HUBSRETROFIT APPLICATIONS

RETROFIT CATCH BASINSRETROFIT APPLICATIONS

RETROFIT DRAIN HUBS
*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, April 09, 2022*

*Change 14*

**AP7.15. APPENDIX 7.15**

**ADVICE CODES**

AP7.15.1.  Advice codes are numeric/alphabetic or numeric/numeric and provide coded instruction to supply sources when such data are considered essential to supply action and entry in narrative form is not feasible.  The requisition transaction advice codes flow from requisition originators to initial processing points and are thereafter perpetuated into passing actions and release/receipt documents.  The excess transaction advice codes flow from Defense Automatic Addressing System (DAAS) to an Inventory Control Point (ICP)/ Integrated Materiel Manager (IMM) to indicate that the excess transaction has been edited by DAAS.  The method of assigning advice codes and listings of requisition/excess transaction advice codes are provided below:

7

AP7.15-6

APPENDIX 7.15
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

RENE CECILIO WILSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge.

(CR-96-181, CA-99-897-2)

Submitted: September 30, 1999 Decided: October 8, 1999

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rene Cecilio Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Fernando Groene, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Rene Cecilio Wilson seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court. See United States v. Wilson, Nos. CR-96-181;

CA-99-897-2 (E.D. Va. July 1, 1999). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3002 

To provide for the carriage of certain television broadcast stations, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 23, 2019 

Mr. NEAL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To provide for the carriage of certain television broadcast 

stations, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CARRIAGE OF TELEVISION BROADCAST STA4 TIONS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi6 sion of law, a cable operator may transmit to subscribers 

7 in Berkshire County, Massachusetts, in the designated 

8 market area of Albany, New York (in this section referred 

9 to as the ‘‘Albany designated market area’’), any television 

10 broadcast station that— 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3002 IH

1 (1) was retransmitted to subscribers located in 

2 Berkshire County in the Albany designated market 

3 area on December 1, 2016; and 

4 (2) as of the date of enactment of this Act, is 

5 not retransmitted to all subscribers in Berkshire 

6 County in the Albany designated market area. 

7 (b) NEGOTIATIONS.—A cable operator that engages 

8 in the retransmission described in subsection (a) shall en9 gage in good faith negotiations within the meaning of sec10 tion 76.65 of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations, or any 

11 successor thereto, with a television broadcast station re12 garding the terms of such retransmission. 

13 (c) NONDUPLICATION.—Any television broadcast sta14 tion licensed to a community within the Albany designated 

15 market area may assert network nonduplication or syn16 dicated exclusivity protections against any cable system in 

17 any cable community located in Berkshire County, Massa18 chusetts. 

19 (d) RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this Act 

20 shall be construed— 

21 (1) to alter any contract provided under section 

22 325 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 

23 325); or 

24 (2) to affect the applicability of any other com25 munications or copyright law related to the retransVerDate Sep 11 2014 23:20 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3002.IH H3002

pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3002 IH

1 mission of a television broadcast station by a cable 

2 operator. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
DLM 4000.25, Volume 4

1

DIC FAR/FAS FORMAT

REPLY TO REQUEST FOR ADJUSTMENT OF NONFUEL BILLING AND

RESPONSE TO FOLLOW-UP ON REQUEST FOR 

ADJUSTMENT OF NON-FUEL BILLING

Field Legend Position(s) Entry and Instructions

DI Code 1-3 Enter 

FAR to reply to an initial request.

FAS to reply to follow-up request.

RI Code 4-6 Perpetuate from the request 

(DI code FAE, FAF).

Recipient of Billing 7 Perpetuate from the request. 

Stock Number 8-22 Perpetuate from the request.

U/I Code 23-24 Perpetuate from the request.

Quantity 25-29 Perpetuate from the request.

Document Number 30-43 Perpetuate from the request.

Suffix Code 44 Perpetuate from the request.

Supplementary Address 45-50 Perpetuate from the request. 

Signal Code 51 Perpetuate from the request.

Fund Code 52-53 Perpetuate from the request.

Bill Number 54-58 Perpetuate from the request.

Billing Status Code 59-61 Enter:

59 Blank or character significant to the 

billing office.

60-61 applicable status code.

Day of the Year 62-64 Enter day of year response is prepared. 

Must be forwarded within three calendar 
DLM 4000.25, Volume 4

2

Field Legend Position(s) Entry and Instructions

days of this day.

Amount 65-73 If the billing status code is not “AI” or “DD” 

enter the adjustment amount.

Otherwise enter: 

65-67 year and month of credit of the bill 

in question. 

68-73 Leave blank.

Unit Price 74-80 Perpetuate from the request.
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2011 - 0449 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2010 - SW - 021 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND> This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
the Unaudited Balance Sheet and Statement of Income for the period ended June
30, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                      1,887,893
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   8,465
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            1,896,358
<PP&E>                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              1,896,358
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         388,582
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                  1,507,776
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                1,896,358
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               48,945
<CGS>                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               83,039
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (34,094)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (34,094)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (34,094)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.003)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.003)


</TABLE>
No. 10-11190.

#### William Frazier, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 872, 132 S. Ct. 226,

181 L. Ed. 2d 126,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6642.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 419 Fed. Appx. 266.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO

RULES 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a),

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
Ron Marshall, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Claires Stores, Inc.;
and

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.



|             |  |  |  |                        
|------------ |  |  |  | -----------------------
|May 23, 2017 |  |  |  | /s/ Ron Marshall       
|             |  |  |  | Ron Marshall           
|             |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer